[ 2012 ] Fairmont / Sunchaser / Northwynd official thread with lawsuit info!

[wagga2650]

If you signed option one out of duress or believing we would be able to see the settlement first before agreeing, The only option for us is to pay up and then sue MG for incompetence etc etc.That's the way I see it.

 

[Floyd55]

If you signed option one out of duress or believing we would be able to see the settlement first before agreeing, The only option for us is to pay up and then sue MG for incompetence etc etc.That's the way I see it.

That is my feeling as well. When I do the math of what my court sanctioned settlement amount would become the day after Feb. 15th I have to say that I am not willing to take on that level of risk going forward. At 162% summary judgement as it is stated in Judge Young's final statements on this matter, that would my amount owing to NM to the mid $30,000 range. Then I would have ongoing legal bills to try and fight this, and then I would have to rely on the courts treating my case favorably at some point in the future. That is what I have been doing up to this point, and this is where we are now. I am done with putting my trust in lawyers and judges! No more risk taking and relying on our legal system to bring me justice. I am paying and getting out. I will rely on carma coming back to bite Kirk Wankel at some point in the future. I can only hope that he ends up in jail for all that he has done to so many people!

 

[FairSun]

That is my feeling as well. When I do the math of what my court sanctioned settlement amount would become the day after Feb. 15th I have to say that I am not willing to take on that level of risk going forward. At 162% summary judgement as it is stated in Judge Young's final statements on this matter, that would my amount owing to NM to the mid $30,000 range. Then I would have ongoing legal bills to try and fight this, and then I would have to rely on the courts treating my case favorably at some point in the future. That is what I have been doing up to this point, and this is where we are now. I am done with putting my trust in lawyers and judges! No more risk taking and relying on our legal system to bring me justice. I am paying and getting out. I will rely on carma coming back to bite Kirk Wankel at some point in the future. I can only hope that he ends up in jail for all that he has done to so many people!

Well said, Floyd55! Ditto to your earlier point that our lawyer at no time quantified our potential personal $$$risk of continuing legal action. If we had any inkling our bill could double from the relinquishment offer in March 2017 to December 2017 and the final settlement and release agreements in NO way would we have stayed in this battle.

 

[Sunchaser Barbados]

Okay, you accept that the Lessor does not have to accept the Lease 'offered for purchase' in Clause 13. But, the Lessor DID accept the deemed offer to sell ....

I agree. No argument from me. The contract specifically states what is to happen if and when Northmont accepts the offer to sell. It is a contract with binding terms or, it is not. Black & white. I know someone will say, "But they didn't accept those terms. They created different terms ... " But, it's a binding contract. This is my same point about the RPF. There is no mechanism in the contract to charge a lessee for anything other than their proportional share of annual operating costs or for damages that result from that lessee's occupancy of a unit. Therefor, Northmont did not have the right to charge the RPF. Not to mention the fact that redesigning the units is neither repairs nor maintenance.

 

[LilMaggie]

Well said, Floyd55! Ditto to your earlier point that our lawyer at no time quantified our potential personal $$$risk of continuing legal action. If we had any inkling our bill could double from the relinquishment offer in March 2017 to December 2017 and the final settlement and release agreements in NO way would we have stayed in this battle.

I think it would be fair and an excellent settlement if MG pays the interest for all of us.

 

[dotbuhler]

Lets keep hammering out there for some exposure to the public and help from the media, etc.!!!!!
As per the advise of others on this forum, I fired off an email briefly explaining our situation to:

marketplace@cbc.ca
Calgarynews@bellmedia.ca
mclaughlinonyourside@ctv.ca
fifthtips@cbc.ca
gopublic@cbc.ca

Lets keep emailing, calling and reaching out to whom ever may be able to hear our horror story and help!!!
If there is anything else anyone can suggest we all do please post or re-post your suggestions!

there is a petition circulating that you can sign on thepetitionsite.com search under People: Dorothy Zazelenchuk. 1000 signature target.

 

[Sunchaser Barbados]

However, unlike a time share, a commercial tenancy involves a one-on-one relationship between a landlord and a tenant that bears little resemblance to the contracts here which govern the collective nature of the interests held by the participants in a time share. The fundamental nature of a time share interest involves not only the creation of a contractual relationship between an owner and the developer, but also a relationship between all owners in the time share. This is evident in many ways.

I disagree, I could be wrong. Also, weren't at least four of the Judges' listed above decisions regarding procedural considerations only and not on the facts of the case? Again, I could be wrong.

Yes, I know what the courts said. My response is the argument quoted above, advanced by a number of Judges is at best, ill-informed. They talk about there being no resemblance between a commercial lease and a timeshare plan. That's crazy talk. How are the timeshare lessees - would everyone stop calling them owners, please! - related in any way different than in the way that tenants sharing a building in a commercial lease are related? The time you can be in your unit and that you share the operating cost and management cost of the property, that's it. Those are the only material differences.

The courts misunderstood who is paying for what and who brought what to the contractual arrangement. How are the lessees related? No say in planning. No say in operations. No say in redevelopment. No say in asset acquisition and deployment. They are tenants in a building who pay the building's operating costs and management costs. The courts are vastly overthinking the situation and I think it is because the word 'owner' is used.

You can't say that the courts can only rule on what is presented; and, then say that those issues have been examined in detail by the courts. It is one or the other. Either the Defense didn't present the necessary evidence to prove their case; or, the Defense did present the necessary evidence and the court ruled against them. I very much think the Defense didn't present the necessary evidence to prove their case.

Everyone has to concede that judges can get it wrong. Juries, usually 12-people, can get it wrong.

 

[Lostmyshirt]

Well said, Floyd55! Ditto to your earlier point that our lawyer at no time quantified our potential personal $$$risk of continuing legal action. If we had any inkling our bill could double from the relinquishment offer in March 2017 to December 2017 and the final settlement and release agreements in NO way would we have stayed in this battle.

true story......where would the value have been to keep paying MG for 4.5 years for this "excellent" result.............as the point had been asked by numerous people on numerous occasions what if??? agree with a previous point of putting the money in trust to proceed therefore stopping the ridiculous interest rate that NM feels so entitled too.

 

[Hotpink]

Perhaps we needed a Judge with the common sense of the one in the Merchant of Venice. Yes Shylock could have his pound of flesh , but he could shed no Blood. At least that's how I remember reading it in Grade 9 nearly six decades ago. It may be the training for Judges once they are appointed says to forget about common sense altogether.

 

[torqued]

To say I have some unique responsibility to other time share Lessee’s is crazy. My contract is with NW not any of my fellow time share lesses. My only responsibility is to pay my maintenance fees and not destroy the resort when I’m there. The rest falls on proper management of operations to ensure our time share experience is what we paid for and what we were told we would receive.

 

[Appauled]

I want to circle back right to the beginning when Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties filed for bankruptcy.

No one including MG has ever answered the following:

How can our timeshare contracts even be valid, when the company we signed with (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) is Bankrupt and gone?

Yet by filing for bankruptcy (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) I’m sure was able to avoid paying any bill's it owed to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc. and should have made all timeshare contracts null and void as they are BANKRUPT.

Then the new owners (we know them as Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) come in, and I’m sure are able to dis-associate themselves from the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties and are also able to avoid all these same above mentioned people that were owed money by the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties.

Yet Kirk Wankel/ Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont is able to access the files of the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, with the names and contracts of all the people who bought with Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties. (Is this not a breach of privacy?)

Then once the new owners have access to all the names and timeshare contracts that belonged to Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, the new owners claim them as their own, even though not a single person was approached and asked if they wanted to sign up with the NEW owners. (Is this legal?)

After the new owners (Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) self-proclaim these Bankrupt timeshare contracts as their own, they are able to magically modify and enforce these timeshare contracts with unjust improvement fees, criminal amounts of compounded 26.8% interest and try to collect from all the timeshare owners that were only involved with the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, all while avoiding to pay money owed by the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties to its to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc.???!!! (How is this legal???)

We have never been given the how and why Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont were able to take over and if it was legal.

WE DID NOT SIGN TIMESHARE CONTRACTS WITH SUNCHASER/NORTHWYND/NORTHMONT!!! OUR TIMESHARE COMPANY FAIRMONT VACATION VILLAS/PROPERTIES WENT BANKRUPT!!!


Where were these most basic facts missed by the lawyers and the courts and allowed to escalate to this outright FRAUD???

 

[LilMaggie]

To say I have some unique responsibility to other time share Lessee’s is crazy. My contract is with NW not any of my fellow time share lesses. My only responsibility is to pay my maintenance fees and not destroy the resort when I’m there. The rest falls on proper management of operations to ensure our time share experience is what we paid for and what we were told we would receive.

My contract is with Fairmont Vacation Villas. Not even NM.

 

[Spark1]

If you signed option one out of duress or believing we would be able to see the settlement first before agreeing, The only option for us is to pay up and then sue MG for incompetence etc etc.That's the way I see it.

What are you paying for and when you do are you released. The bill come this way pay example $40000.00. Nothing is itemized. Pay by Credit Card. Be careful take this to the Canadian anti-fraud centre. You might be only paying the maintenance fee for the time they took the right to use from you and they will send you another bill that you have to pay to get out of the resort. Be careful.

 

[Floyd55]

What are you paying for and when you do are you released. The bill come this way pay example $40000.00. Nothing is itemized. Pay by Credit Card. Be careful take this to the Canadian anti-fraud centre. You might be only paying the maintenance fee for the time they took the right to use from you and they will send you another bill that you have to pay to get out of the resort. Be careful.

The legal wording of the settlement clearly states that there will be a severance of all ties to Northmont and the resort as a result of paying the settlement fee. I am not worried about that aspect personally. I am just super choked that I have to pay this ridiculous settlement amount to these crooks! Appears to be no way around it from where I am standing without taking on huge risk in the future. Fortunately for me, I can pay to get out, but I'm not happy about it! I won't be paying until the last possible minute. Still praying for a miracle!

 

[Roxanne]

That is my feeling as well. When I do the math of what my court sanctioned settlement amount would become the day after Feb. 15th I have to say that I am not willing to take on that level of risk going forward. At 162% summary judgement as it is stated in Judge Young's final statements on this matter, that would my amount owing to NM to the mid $30,000 range. Then I would have ongoing legal bills to try and fight this, and then I would have to rely on the courts treating my case favorably at some point in the future. That is what I have been doing up to this point, and this is where we are now. I am done with putting my trust in lawyers and judges! No more risk taking and relying on our legal system to bring me justice. I am paying and getting out. I will rely on carma coming back to bite Kirk Wankel at some point in the future. I can only hope that he ends up in jail for all that he has done to so many people!

The legal wording of the settlement clearly states that there will be a severance of all ties to Northmont and the resort as a result of paying the settlement fee. I am not worried about that aspect personally. I am just super choked that I have to pay this ridiculous settlement amount to these crooks! Appears to be no way around it from where I am standing without taking on huge risk in the future. Fortunately for me, I can pay to get out, but I'm not happy about it! I won't be paying until the last possible minute. Still praying for a miracle!

Our plan is exactly the same, won't b paying till the last minute and pray for a miracle.

 

[Tanny13]

I want to circle back right to the beginning when Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties filed for bankruptcy.

No one including MG has ever answered the following:

How can our timeshare contracts even be valid, when the company we signed with (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) is Bankrupt and gone?

Yet by filing for bankruptcy (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) I’m sure was able to avoid paying any bill's it owed to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc. and should have made all timeshare contracts null and void as they are BANKRUPT.

Then the new owners (we know them as Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) come in, and I’m sure are able to dis-associate themselves from the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties and are also able to avoid all these same above mentioned people that were owed money by the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties.

Yet Kirk Wankel/ Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont is able to access the files of the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, with the names and contracts of all the people who bought with Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties. (Is this not a breach of privacy?)

Then once the new owners have access to all the names and timeshare contracts that belonged to Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, the new owners claim them as their own, even though not a single person was approached and asked if they wanted to sign up with the NEW owners. (Is this legal?)

After the new owners (Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) self-proclaim these Bankrupt timeshare contracts as their own, they are able to magically modify and enforce these timeshare contracts with unjust improvement fees, criminal amounts of compounded 26.8% interest and try to collect from all the timeshare owners that were only involved with the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, all while avoiding to pay money owed by the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties to its to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc.???!!! (How is this legal???)

We have never been given the how and why Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont were able to take over and if it was legal.

WE DID NOT SIGN TIMESHARE CONTRACTS WITH SUNCHASER/NORTHWYND/NORTHMONT!!! OUR TIMESHARE COMPANY FAIRMONT VACATION VILLAS/PROPERTIES WENT BANKRUPT!!!


Where were these most basic facts missed by the lawyers and the courts and allowed to escalate to this outright FRAUD???

Great questions! I recall, in reading the CCAA documents, that part of the justification for the judges allowing Northmont to take over our contracts was to PROTECT the rights of the owners and ensure we all still have access to the resort for the remainder of our contracts. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

 

[NeverNeverAgain]

The court considered that argument, but disagreed. And not one judge, but multiple judges reviewing the contract and reached (or sustained) that decision:

[258] Accordingly, I conclude that the plain reading of paragraph 9 is that all costs relating to the operation of the Resort, whether in the nature of capital costs or not, are to be borne by the owners. This applies even in the event of reconstruction of parts of the Resort as needed, whether from deferred maintenance issues or otherwise. There is no basis upon which the JEKE VIAs can be said to limit the responsibility to pay costs only for “regular maintenance” or “reasonable wear and tear”, as JEKE argues.

ECWINCH, thank you for your posts, they are very informative and I wish you had started sooner. Please continue to contribute with your views as they can be very helpful understanding this mess.

I wish I understood this point more. First, we are not owners, we have leases. As said by the judges, capital costs are to be borne by owners. We, as renters, own nothing and have no input into the decisions. How can we be responsible for all costs when we have no decision in the costs. To take this to the extreme, what keeps me from getting a bill in year 40 of my 40 year lease for future renovations. As mentioned by someone else, can they plan to pave the parking lots with gold in year 40, and bill me? They can then sell and pocket the money. This makes no sense. There could be no end to the costs to the lease holders. Normally, costs are constrained by an owners association as they determine what is reasonable, but we lease holders do not have one. Please let me know what I am missing.

When I purchased my lease, I was told (yea, I know) that they could not hold me responsible for renovation costs or other capital costs, hence the advantage of a 40 year lease verses actually owning. The buildings were new, well built to require minimal maintenance, and would last through the 40 years. This made sense at the time.

I have some background in rental contracts with rental real estate and do not know how the judges could make this decision. Capital costs are treated entirely different than operating expenses, costs being taken as depreciation over time. It has been said that the judges ruled that we own the buildings, not the land. Does someone know where and how they ruled this?

 

[Appauled]

I want to circle back right to the beginning when Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties filed for bankruptcy.

No one including MG has ever answered the following:

How can our timeshare contracts even be valid, when the company we signed with (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) is Bankrupt and gone?

Yet by filing for bankruptcy (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) I’m sure was able to avoid paying any bill's it owed to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc. and should have made all timeshare contracts null and void as they are BANKRUPT.

Then the new owners (we know them as Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) come in, and I’m sure are able to dis-associate themselves from the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties and are also able to avoid all these same above mentioned people that were owed money by the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties.

Yet Kirk Wankel/ Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont is able to access the files of the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, with the names and contracts of all the people who bought with Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties. (Is this not a breach of privacy?)

Then once the new owners have access to all the names and timeshare contracts that belonged to Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, the new owners claim them as their own, even though not a single person was approached and asked if they wanted to sign up with the NEW owners. (Is this legal?)

After the new owners (Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) self-proclaim these Bankrupt timeshare contracts as their own, they are able to magically modify and enforce these timeshare contracts with unjust improvement fees, criminal amounts of compounded 26.8% interest and try to collect from all the timeshare owners that were only involved with the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, all while avoiding to pay money owed by the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties to its to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc.???!!! (How is this legal???)

We have never been given the how and why Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont were able to take over and if it was legal.

WE DID NOT SIGN TIMESHARE CONTRACTS WITH SUNCHASER/NORTHWYND/NORTHMONT!!! OUR TIMESHARE COMPANY FAIRMONT VACATION VILLAS/PROPERTIES WENT BANKRUPT!!!


Where were these most basic facts missed by the lawyers and the courts and allowed to escalate to this outright FRAUD???

Great questions! I recall, in reading the CCAA documents, that part of the justification for the judges allowing Northmont to take over our contracts was to PROTECT the rights of the owners and ensure we all still have access to the resort for the remainder of our contracts. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

Yes, ironic indeed. Where is the protection in that? Who has the money to access timeshares at the criminal price range of $20,000 to $100,000+ for maintenance, improvement and interest fees? This is FRAUD!

 

[LilMaggie]

I want to circle back right to the beginning when Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties filed for bankruptcy.

No one including MG has ever answered the following:

How can our timeshare contracts even be valid, when the company we signed with (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) is Bankrupt and gone?

Yet by filing for bankruptcy (Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties) I’m sure was able to avoid paying any bill's it owed to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc. and should have made all timeshare contracts null and void as they are BANKRUPT.

Then the new owners (we know them as Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) come in, and I’m sure are able to dis-associate themselves from the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties and are also able to avoid all these same above mentioned people that were owed money by the now bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties.

Yet Kirk Wankel/ Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont is able to access the files of the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, with the names and contracts of all the people who bought with Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties. (Is this not a breach of privacy?)

Then once the new owners have access to all the names and timeshare contracts that belonged to Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, the new owners claim them as their own, even though not a single person was approached and asked if they wanted to sign up with the NEW owners. (Is this legal?)

After the new owners (Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont) self-proclaim these Bankrupt timeshare contracts as their own, they are able to magically modify and enforce these timeshare contracts with unjust improvement fees, criminal amounts of compounded 26.8% interest and try to collect from all the timeshare owners that were only involved with the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties, all while avoiding to pay money owed by the bankrupt Fairmont Vacation Villas/Properties to its to suppliers, contractors, maintenance people, etc.???!!! (How is this legal???)

We have never been given the how and why Kirk Wankel / Sunchaser/ Northwynd/ Northmont were able to take over and if it was legal.

WE DID NOT SIGN TIMESHARE CONTRACTS WITH SUNCHASER/NORTHWYND/NORTHMONT!!! OUR TIMESHARE COMPANY FAIRMONT VACATION VILLAS/PROPERTIES WENT BANKRUPT!!!


Where were these most basic facts missed by the lawyers and the courts and allowed to escalate to this outright FRAUD???



Yes, ironic indeed. Where is the protection in that? Who has the money to access timeshares at the criminal price range of $20,000 to $100,000+ for maintenance, improvement and interest fees? This is FRAUD!

It protected the owners alright...us lessees...not so much!!

 

[Been Around Awhile]

From an objective standpoint, I think the court explained the reasoning behind it's decision(s) in great detail.

Lessee shall be responsible for his proportionate share of all administration, maintenance and repair costs (the "Operating Costs") and replacement costs

If you are responsible for maintenance, repair, and replacement costs - what are you being asked to pay that is not in that category?

If Northmont - as you seem to suggest - had simply baked the refurbishment project onto the maintenance fees on a multi-year basis - what would be the difference?

One has to come down on one side or the other. The long list of Judges enumerated heard all the facts and fully examined the issue. Or, the Defense Legal Team did a poor job of presenting the facts upon which the Judges could deliberate and render a decision which, makes that decision suspect. One cannot say both are true.

How could Loo have not understood the concept of Capital Costs? Capital Costs are one time, fixed charges often spread over more than one operating year. Like the Renovation Plan. Capital costs are initially Capitalized as an asset on a balance sheet. Over the useful life of the asset, it gets expensed through depreciation on the annual operating statement. No business approaching the size and scope of Fairmont / Northmont does not list capital costs in their financial statements. If Lessees were meant to pay for capital costs they'd be identified in the Lease Agreement. It is that simple. Otherwise it is intentionally deceptive. It was 1999 after all, not prior to the Industrial Revolution.

How could this not have been made clear by our collection of lawyers? Fairmont and Northmont both would have depreciation on their annual statements. It's not like they could say, "Capital Costs, never heard of the concept." Wankel is an accountant when he's not playing World of Warcraft. He is more than capable of understanding Capital Budgets, Balance Sheets, Operating Budgets and Operating Statements which, are also called Profit and Loss Statements (P&L) or Income Statements and report the revenue and expenses over a reporting period - almost always 12-months or 1-year.

My 1999 Lease Agreement puts the repairs and maintenance in the context of work that can be done during one year's time, a reporting period. The replacement reserve is also clearly referring to the refurbishing of furniture and fixtures within each unit, in my version of the Lease Agreement anyway.

The financial statements describe the operation of the property and the value of the property. The corporate documents, the corporate structure, and the contracts to which Northmont is a party describe the 'Project' as Loo calls it. Nowhere in all of those documents are lessees characterized as having an investment in nor ownership of the property or its assets. If it's sold, they get nothing, as evidenced by the bankruptcy sale of Fairmont to Northmont. If a wall falls on a passerby they aren't responsible. They don't own the wall that fell, the roof or foundation that didn't hold it in place and, they don't manage the property. They cannot even effect a change in management. Not their problem.

It is an insult that Northmont is allowed do so many things not provided for in the terms and conditions of the contract. I'm sorry, and maybe it's our lawyers' fault, but the courts didn't get it. Ok, now I'll shut-up.

 

[MgolferL]

I think it would be fair and an excellent settlement if MG pays the interest for all of us.

IF we are going to pursue something like that, we better start the process now. I have to go thru the release in more detail, but think, once it's signed we are also releasing the lawyer and agreeing to a gag order against ALL parties.

We may have to go after him thru his insurance company....ALL lawyers have to carry it, just for this this reason... He gave BAD advice (do not pay) which cost us individually...... ... and most of us have emails to substantiate that. I think those complaints have to be done before paying and signing off though.

As well, spoke to someone who was familiar as to the start of this. It seems that young Mr. MG was extremely green and had never tried a major case before AKA... this was his first. The rest of the lawyers walked away because no one was playing nice in the sandbox and he had all sorts of "fresh out of school" ideas, but little to no practical experience... hence our dilemma and misguided legal advice.

 

[MgolferL]

I disagree, I could be wrong. Also, weren't at least four of the Judges' listed above decisions regarding procedural considerations only and not on the facts of the case? Again, I could be wrong.

Yes, I know what the courts said. My response is the argument quoted above, advanced by a number of Judges is at best, ill-informed. They talk about there being no resemblance between a commercial lease and a timeshare plan. That's crazy talk. How are the timeshare lessees - would everyone stop calling them owners, please! - related in any way different than in the way that tenants sharing a building in a commercial lease are related? The time you can be in your unit and that you share the operating cost and management cost of the property, that's it. Those are the only material differences.

The courts misunderstood who is paying for what and who brought what to the contractual arrangement. How are the lessees related? No say in planning. No say in operations. No say in redevelopment. No say in asset acquisition and deployment. They are tenants in a building who pay the building's operating costs and management costs. The courts are vastly overthinking the situation and I think it is because the word 'owner' is used.

You can't say that the courts can only rule on what is presented; and, then say that those issues have been examined in detail by the courts. It is one or the other. Either the Defense didn't present the necessary evidence to prove their case; or, the Defense did present the necessary evidence and the court ruled against them. I very much think the Defense didn't present the necessary evidence to prove their case.

Everyone has to concede that judges can get it wrong. Juries, usually 12-people, can get it wrong.

You are right... Defense didn't present the necessary evidence AND information and ignored the suggested direction of the judges. Apparently he knew more than the judge.

 

[Ultimate_Betrayal]

Unfortunately the Courts did get it – what they got was a well researched and executed plan by Northmont.

Geldert did have a chance to properly contest the RPF that created the reason to stay or leave in many different ways but during the initial trial became constrained with what he could put in front of the Judge – I believe I may have a reason why and am currently working on validating that.

But this set off the downward spiral along with taking no alternative path that has let us here to where we are.

Northmont can take full advantage of Geldert’s which I am loosely calling errors at this point and is going to fully capitalize on them.

At this point there is no trying to fight the contract (whichever one it is), or Northmont as Geldert has given them everything and then some.

It is definitely not fair and is the reason we all need to ensure we have individually contacted by email and phone the Law Societies with our grievances toward Geldert and the Judge’s office, every Minister, and Politician with a concise detailing of how a Canadian Corporation has been allowed by the Canadian Courts to take advantage there is no protection and reap huge profits off our backs while virtually giving nothing more in return then the termination of a prepaid lease.

I cannot take credit for finding this but please post it on your Facebook groups or other places:
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...stin-trudeau-to-hold-edmonton-town-hall-feb-1

Might be a good time for Raging Grannies and Grandpa’s to send a National message – maybe the Prime Minister will give some quality time to hard working Canadians who aren’t liars, sex offenders, or terrorists.

 

[LilMaggie]

IF we are going to pursue something like that, we better start the process now. I have to go thru the release in more detail, but think, once it's signed we are also releasing the lawyer and agreeing to a gag order against ALL parties.

We may have to go after him thru his insurance company....ALL lawyers have to carry it, just for this this reason... He gave BAD advice (do not pay) which cost us individually...... ... and most of us have emails to substantiate that. I think those complaints have to be done before paying and signing off though.

As well, spoke to someone who was familiar as to the start of this. It seems that young Mr. MG was extremely green and had never tried a major case before AKA... this was his first. The rest of the lawyers walked away because no one was playing nice in the sandbox and he had all sorts of "fresh out of school" ideas, but little to no practical experience... hence our dilemma and misguided legal advice.

He was called to the bar in 2006...not a very long time to practice, but he notes on his website that he is experienced in corporate and real estate law/litigation. A more experienced lawyer would likely have known when he was out of his depth.

 

[LilMaggie]

Unfortunately the Courts did get it – what they got was a well researched and executed plan by Northmont.

Geldert did have a chance to properly contest the RPF that created the reason to stay or leave in many different ways but during the initial trial became constrained with what he could put in front of the Judge – I believe I may have a reason why and am currently working on validating that.

But this set off the downward spiral along with taking no alternative path that has let us here to where we are.

Northmont can take full advantage of Geldert’s which I am loosely calling errors at this point and is going to fully capitalize on them.

At this point there is no trying to fight the contract (whichever one it is), or Northmont as Geldert has given them everything and then some.

It is definitely not fair and is the reason we all need to ensure we have individually contacted by email and phone the Law Societies with our grievances toward Geldert and the Judge’s office, every Minister, and Politician with a concise detailing of how a Canadian Corporation has been allowed by the Canadian Courts to take advantage there is no protection and reap huge profits off our backs while virtually giving nothing more in return then the termination of a prepaid lease.

I cannot take credit for finding this but please post it on your Facebook groups or other places:
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...stin-trudeau-to-hold-edmonton-town-hall-feb-1

Might be a good time for Raging Grannies and Grandpa’s to send a National message – maybe the Prime Minister will give some quality time to hard working Canadians who aren’t liars, sex offenders, or terrorists.

How I would love to rage at that town hall meeting!